On 04/02/11 09:44, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Hi,
2011/2/4 Andrew Soltau <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Hi Bruno
In step seven what is proved is that
MEC + 'big universe' entails that physic is a branch of
computer science.
Do you see that?
I have no problem with the concept that psychology is a branch of
computer science.
Step 5 plays the big role there. You don't need to be
annihilated for having your continuations determined by the
first person comp indeterminacy on UD*, once a UD, a fortiori
an omega point, is in the physical universe.
In step eight, the assumption of the existence of a big
universe is eliminated. Roughly because no universal machine
at all can distinguish arithmetical reality from anything
else. This throws away the need of any universe. Physics has
to be justified by number relations only (numbers or any
elementary terms of a Sigma_1 complete theory).
OK?
OK in that 'no universal machine at all can distinguish
arithmetical reality from anything else.' We cannot tell if we are
in a simulation, obviously.
This leaves us with the white rabbit problem.
With the whole UDA1-8, you should understand that all what has
been done, by the use of MEC, is a reduction of the mind body
problem to a body problem in computer science.
This seems straightforward.
At first sight we might think that we are just very close to a
refutation of comp, because, as I think you have intuited,
there might be an avalanche of first person 'white rabbits'
that is aberrant, or just "white noisy" experiences.
To find a proper measure on the consistent continuations is
very difficult, and that is why I have restricted myself to
the search of the logic of the certainties, for Löbian
machines. Löban machines are chosen because they have enough
introspection power and cognitive abilities to describe what
they can prove about their certainties, and what they can
infer interrogatively. That is not entirely trivial and relies
mainly on the work of Gödel, Löb and Solovay (and Post,
Turing, Kleene, etc.)
Perhaps you can explain the principle on which there is a
restriction of white rabbits.
Our experience, apparently of the phsyical world, is entirely
devoid of white rabbits.
You can't infer that because you do not observe white rabbits that
there is none ;)
Quite like the anthropic principle, if at each moments there are
overwelmingly more moments where you are just turned into gaz dust...
there exists a continuation of you (at least one) that is consistent
with a world devoid of WR. The WR problem seems the same question as
... Why am I in that particular universe ? You are because that is
consistent with you... As you can't feel all the other you who have
not your luck you can't say that because you do not observe it, it is
not like that after all...
If tomorrow you observe a WR (a magical one ;) ) well... You'll know
at least you're no more in a physical world devoid of white rabbits...
and you can begin to be really scared ;)
Also I think you will agree that all continuation where you're not...
have a zero measure (from your POV). So you can't be where you can't
be, nothing to be astonished here ;)
Regards,
Quentin
Thus, at each moment, the range of possible next observations is
always observed to be constrained precisely according to the
quantum formalism.
Given that the only definition of the history of the observer is
the record of observations, I am greatly intrigued to know how one
can, at each moment, even in principle, derive the sensory
specific next moment, according to quantum rules, from this
structure of information.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:everything-list%[email protected]>.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Hi
'White Rabbits' is Bruno's shorthand for physically impossible
observations. At least, as I understand it.
My query is that, since we only ever observe the environment to be in
accord with physical quantum law, how can a purely arithmetical
environment, which necessarily includes all possible computations, give
rise to only observations which are self evidently observations of a
physical environment, and a quantum environment at that.
Andrew
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
